If there were a just God

[lightgigantic]

What actions he has done to make him a criminal well have you read the Bible. Did you get to the part about the great flood how about that one for instance. And do say man brought that on him self as that may or may not be the case that is like saying the world brought it on them selves before ww1 and ww2. There is the Tower of Babel were he devided the races and deliberatly made every one not speak the same language and in do that caused mistrust and hatred among his Children. Things like that.

Once again .....

Given this piece of information ....

BG 2.20 For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain.

... what specific crimes are you suggesting god is an accomplice to?

IOW if death in the material world is simply a closure to a mere chapter of an individual's pursuit of desire (and subsequent consequences) that gives rise to another similar chapter (until such a time as we get a proper grip on the whole desire thing), what's the problem? Sounds like a perfect rehabilitation program to me.

Perhaps your argument is valid from the perspective of someone who doesn't want o be rehabilitated.

(In fact your argument doesn't even seem to factor in the variety of desire, even misaligned desire.)

 

[spidergoat]

then we are back to the old pickle of the role application, based on theory, plays in mapping the path to conclusion ....

 

[lightgigantic]

a requirement for an indication of existence is a requirement for (correct) theory, (correct) application and (correct) conclusion.

For instance using tape measures as a requirement of indication of temperature is more an indication of incorrectness than anything else (no matter how much you glorify its sheer brilliance in measuring distance)

 

[wynn]

a requirement for an indication of existence is a requirement for (correct) theory, (correct) application and (correct) conclusion.

I wonder why it is so difficult for this to sink in when it comes to matters of God.

People generally see no problem applying it when it comes to worldly skills and knowledge, but it all tends to end when it comes to matters of God.


Although this same reluctance can be observed even in relation to worldly skills and knowledge: in beginners and those who remain with a relatively low fund of knowledge and skill in a particular field.

There is even a name for it: Dunning–Kruger effect, a cognitive bias in which "people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it"; a case of illusory superiority.


Another factor for this reluctance seems to be that there appears to be the general impression in the so-called West that when it comes to God, there isn't really all that much to learn, know or do to begin with.

 

[lightgigantic]

I wonder why it is so difficult for this to sink in when it comes to matters of God.

People generally see no problem applying it when it comes to worldly skills and knowledge, but it all tends to end when it comes to matters of God.

I think a lot has to do with the larger ante that god brings to the table. IOW it is not just an authority but the mother of all authorities

Although this same reluctance can be observed even in relation to worldly skills and knowledge: in beginners and those who remain with a relatively low fund of knowledge and skill in a particular field.

There is even a name for it: Dunning–Kruger effect, a cognitive bias in which "people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it"; a case of illusory superiority.

Proactive Interference is another name it goes under ... although when pressed with this atheists tend to slide into the position that atheism is bereft of any ideological compounds and has nothing to offer in the name of interference (IOW the proactive interference gets carried to a greater level of interference)

Another factor for this reluctance seems to be that there appears to be the general impression in the so-called West that when it comes to God, there isn't really all that much to learn, know or do to begin with.

I guess the Dunning - Krueger effects says it all ....

# Incompetent individuals tend to overestimate their own level of skill.
# Incompetent individuals fail to recognize genuine skill in others.
# Incompetent individuals fail to recognize the extremity of their inadequacy.

The west is spiritually incompetent
:shrug:

 

[Grim_Reaper]

Once again .....

Given this piece of information ....

BG 2.20 For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain.

... what specific crimes are you suggesting god is an accomplice to?

IOW if death in the material world is simply a closure to a mere chapter of an individual's pursuit of desire (and subsequent consequences) that gives rise to another similar chapter (until such a time as we get a proper grip on the whole desire thing), what's the problem? Sounds like a perfect rehabilitation program to me.

Perhaps your argument is valid from the perspective of someone who doesn't want o be rehabilitated.

(In fact your argument doesn't even seem to factor in the variety of desire, even misaligned desire.)

Dude you are rambling here the questions is if there was a just god you have to prove there is one before you can decided if it is just. All I am saying is that if and that is a big IF there is a god that thing is far from being just according to its own provided Text.

 

[lightgigantic]

Dude you are rambling here the questions is if there was a just god you have to prove there is one before you can decided if it is just.

Actually if you look at the OP ....

("If there was a just god ...")

... the question is stated quite simply
:shrug:

All I am saying is that if and that is a big IF there is a god that thing is far from being just according to its own provided Text.

If you really want to run with the bigness of the if, I think you have decide which hat you want to wear for the sake of this thread

 

[spidergoat]

a requirement for an indication of existence is a requirement for (correct) theory, (correct) application and (correct) conclusion.

For instance using tape measures as a requirement of indication of temperature is more an indication of incorrectness than anything else (no matter how much you glorify its sheer brilliance in measuring distance)

I still don't get it, but that's OK. The problem is you claim there can be no measuring device at all for something that is supposed to interact with our lives in a physical way.

 

[lightgigantic]

I still don't get it, but that's OK. The problem is you claim there can be no measuring device at all for something that is supposed to interact with our lives in a physical way.

Not at all

I am claiming that there is a whole different means to "measuring" ... and no need to introduce vastly esoteric subjects to the issue ... since the methods people use to "measure" such personalities as the president or one's parents are remarkably similar.

 

[Grim_Reaper]

Actually if you look at the OP ....

("If there was a just god ...")

... the question is stated quite simply
:shrug:



If you really want to run with the bigness of the if, I think you have decide which hat you want to wear for the sake of this thread

Well I though I clearly had on the Religious people are all weak minded slaves that believe in a mythical entity hat. Guess you must have jumped in the middle and appear to have not read any of my other posts. But then again I figure you are one of the weak minded people so I will let that slide.

 

[lightgigantic]

Well I though I clearly had on the Religious people are all weak minded slaves that believe in a mythical entity hat. Guess you must have jumped in the middle and appear to have not read any of my other posts. But then again I figure you are one of the weak minded people so I will let that slide.

Let me explain

If you want to discuss any if question, you have to at least be prepared to go a certain distance with it.


IOW if you're making statements like this ....

the questions is if there was a just god you have to prove there is one before you can decided if it is just

... its hard to fathom why you bother (especially when you previously made the effort to string some sort of argument about a god, albeit one that ultimately doesn't exist in your esteemed opinion, that is not just)

:shrug:

 

[Grim_Reaper]

Let me explain

If you want to discuss any if question, you have to at least be prepared to go a certain distance with it.


IOW if you're making statements like this ....

the questions is if there was a just god you have to prove there is one before you can decided if it is just

... its hard to fathom why you bother (especially when you previously made the effort to string some sort of argument about a god, albeit one that ultimately doesn't exist in your esteemed opinion, that is not just)

:shrug:

Ok no you are really smoking it I dont have to prove God exsists I KNOW that it does not. You how ever have not show any proof of said God let alone if said God is just. As I said before must be that religous mind at work again hey. Or am I speaking to fast for you to keep up.

 

[lightgigantic]

Ok no you are really smoking it I dont have to prove God exsists I KNOW that it does not. You how ever have not show any proof of said God let alone if said God is just. As I said before must be that religous mind at work again hey. Or am I speaking to fast for you to keep up.

It might pay to slow down a bit.

An if/then statement is a conditional statement.

An is statement is a constitutional statement.

For instance, we could spend hours discussing what you would/could eat if you were hungry. It wouldn't even matter whether you believed you were hungry or not.

Now check out the OP title and ask yourself whether it is constitutional or conditional in nature ...

:shrug:

 

[Grim_Reaper]

Well I am seeing it as a Conditional statement and the condition is IF there is a Just god. I said you first have to prove there IS a god before you can say IF it is Just. And as far as discussing what I could have ot IF I was hungry could take hours but not likly as I KNOW what I like and dislike so it would not take long at all.

 

[lightgigantic]

Well I am seeing it as a Conditional statement
and the condition is IF there is a Just god. I said you first have to prove there IS a god before you can say IF it is Just. And as far as discussing what I could have ot IF I was hungry could take hours but not likly as I KNOW what I like and dislike so it would not take long at all.

/facepalm

(while a conditional term can be factual, it can just as easily be hypothetical)

If it's raining here now, then it was raining on the West Coast this morning.
If it's raining now, then your laundry is getting wet.
If it's raining now, there will be mushrooms to pick next week.

If it rains this afternoon, then yesterday's weather forecast was wrong.
If it rains this afternoon, your garden party is doomed.
If it rains this afternoon, everybody will stay home.

If I become President, I'll lower taxes.

and similarly, as stated in the OP

well we know you exist and if we suppose the God exists then...

ok?

 

[wynn]

I think a lot has to do with the larger ante that god brings to the table. IOW it is not just an authority but the mother of all authorities

I suppose much comes down to the image a person (theist or atheist) has of God.

Many Westerners conceive of God as an old moloch with teenage angst issues who also happens to be omnipotent.
"God is that being than whom no more evil being can be conceived."

I am not exaggerating.

Being expected to trust this monster, to think it authoritative ... it's no wonder people are atheists.

I often hear the argument that we envy God. I have had a lot of trouble accepting this, because my image of God was that of that old moloch - and who would envy that?!

SP himself once noted that people in India are sometimes envious of God, whereas Westerners are not so -

When we present Krishna, especially in India, people are sometimes envious of Him. But outside India, people have reacted differently. I have placed before them that “Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. You are searching after God. Here is God. Here is God’s name, here is God’s address, here are God’s activities. Try to understand God. Why are you speculating?” And they have accepted. They are not asuyava. They are not envious.
source

Anyway, this is not to say that Westerners in no way envy God. But the Western envy of God seems different than the Eastern one. The way God is presented in Indian theism - that God actually is enviable. The Western one is not (unless one is really deranged).

The west is spiritually incompetent

It helps to understand one's incompetence ...

 

[Grim_Reaper]

/facepalm

(while a conditional term can be factual, it can just as easily be hypothetical)

If it's raining here now, then it was raining on the West Coast this morning.
If it's raining now, then your laundry is getting wet.
If it's raining now, there will be mushrooms to pick next week.

If it rains this afternoon, then yesterday's weather forecast was wrong.
If it rains this afternoon, your garden party is doomed.
If it rains this afternoon, everybody will stay home.

If I become President, I'll lower taxes.

and similarly, as stated in the OP

well we know you exist and if we suppose the God exists then...

ok?

If you were not so weak mind and blinded by religion you would see there is no god.
If you did not have your head up your ass you may be able to carry on a conversation.
If you realized that you are a lone in the world and did not have a god you would likely shoot yourself.
If you were not so anal you may ba a nice person.
But I still don't see what this or anything you have said has to do with the proof of a just God or any god for that matter. You are just making mindless posts in an attempt to try and look like you know what you are talking about.

So in closing IF and again that if a big IF you were not so diluted with your God you maybe able to see some one else's point of view.

 

[Lori_7]

If you were not so weak mind and blinded by religion you would see there is no god.
If you did not have your head up your ass you may be able to carry on a conversation.
If you realized that you are a lone in the world and did not have a god you would likely shoot yourself.
If you were not so anal you may ba a nice person.
But I still don't see what this or anything you have said has to do with the proof of a just God or any god for that matter. You are just making mindless posts in an attempt to try and look like you know what you are talking about.

So in closing IF and again that if a big IF you were not so diluted with your God you maybe able to see some one else's point of view.

this may win the award for most hypocritical post.

 

[wynn]

If you were not so weak mind and blinded by religion you would see there is no god.
If you did not have your head up your ass you may be able to carry on a conversation.
If you realized that you are a lone in the world and did not have a god you would likely shoot yourself.
If you were not so anal you may ba a nice person.
But I still don't see what this or anything you have said has to do with the proof of a just God or any god for that matter. You are just making mindless posts in an attempt to try and look like you know what you are talking about.

So in closing IF and again that if a big IF you were not so diluted with your God you maybe able to see some one else's point of view.

You really are embarrassing yourself ...

 

[spidergoat]

...The ultimate aim is to be able to serve god with unalloyed devotion. Its nature of conditioned life to siphon away that aim and its the nature of applying one's self to theistic practices to remedy that calamity.

How do you know what God wants?

How are theistic practices derived?